linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH net v2] net/smc: Remove redundant refcount increase

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <YxBWF7QCN+TnLk+4@TonyMac-Alibaba>
Date:   Thu, 1 Sep 2022 14:49:59 +0800
From:   Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>
To:     liuyacan@...p.netease.com
Cc:     davem@...emloft.net, edumazet@...gle.com, kgraul@...ux.ibm.com,
        kuba@...nel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
        linux-s390@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
        pabeni@...hat.com, wenjia@...ux.ibm.com, hwippel@...ux.ibm.com,
        ubraun@...ux.ibm.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH net v2] net/smc: Remove redundant refcount increase

On Tue, Aug 30, 2022 at 11:23:14PM +0800, liuyacan@...p.netease.com wrote:
> From: Yacan Liu <liuyacan@...p.netease.com>
> 
> For passive connections, the refcount increment has been done in
> smc_clcsock_accept()-->smc_sock_alloc().
> 
> Fixes: 3b2dec2603d5 ("net/smc: restructure client and server code in af_smc")
> Signed-off-by: Yacan Liu <liuyacan@...p.netease.com>
> 
> ---
> Change in v2:
>   -- Tune commit message
> ---
>  net/smc/af_smc.c | 1 -
>  1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/net/smc/af_smc.c b/net/smc/af_smc.c
> index 79c1318af..0939cc3b9 100644
> --- a/net/smc/af_smc.c
> +++ b/net/smc/af_smc.c
> @@ -1855,7 +1855,6 @@ static void smc_listen_out_connected(struct smc_sock *new_smc)
>  {
>  	struct sock *newsmcsk = &new_smc->sk;
>  
> -	sk_refcnt_debug_inc(newsmcsk);
>  	if (newsmcsk->sk_state == SMC_INIT)
>  		newsmcsk->sk_state = SMC_ACTIVE;
>  

Thanks for this fixes. I dig into this sk_refcnt_debug_* facility. It
seems this is a very old debug methods and doesn't help a lot for sock
leak issue. Maybe there is another method to help track this issue?

For this patch, It looks good for me and tested in our environment.

Reviewed-by: Tony Lu <tonylu@...ux.alibaba.com>

Cheers,
Tony Lu